Text Size

INDIANAPOLIS -- With his summer-long windup to a presidential campaign finally nearing an end, actor-politician Fred Thompson defended his late entry into the race and said the continued interest in him is a reflection of Republican dissatisfaction with the rest of the field.

But, in a Politico interview, Thompson also served notice that at least one measure of political strength -- fundraising -- is likely to look a bit wan when the next disclosure reports are released, reflecting a sluggish summer.

“I imagine we will fall off some in July and August and have a great September,” Thompson said, boasting he “would compare what we’ve been able to do in a few months with what others have done in their first few months, whenever that was.”

Thompson’s plunge into the race, which aides once indicated would happen around the Fourth of July and is now planned for after Labor Day, comes amid increasingly public hand-wringing by supporters over whether he has waited too long to capitalize on the surge of interest that accompanied reports of a potential candidacy more than five months ago.

Beyond the mere anxiety of the waiting game, he has suffered through a summer of stumbles. In a short period of time, Thompson has already been hit with the sort of problems that it takes most campaigns months longer -- not to mention a full-blown candidacy -- to accrue.

And some operatives close to the Thompson campaign continue to express concern about staff turmoil and organizational shortcomings. The rumblings are raising questions more broadly among Republican insiders about whether Thompson has the discipline and zeal to wage a winning campaign -- much less craft a message that can distinguish himself from the current crop of GOP contenders.

A rowdy reception, a muted message

The putative candidate -- looking noticeably thinner while chatting in a hotel conference room filled with aides and local backers -- said that he is ready to answer the skeptics and that there is still plenty of time for a candidacy to take flight.

“Historically, people don’t get in this soon,” Thompson pointed out. “The question is about the fact that everybody else is out there and [they] have spent all this time and all this money -- and I still clearly have a shot. That ought to answer that question in and of itself.”

But he acknowledged his circumstances put him in a situation where nearly everything must go right over the next several months if he is to make the transition from the potential candidate with lots of buzz to a real candidate with lots of votes.

“We’re doing in a few months what other people have done in a much, much longer period of time,” he said. “It’s just that simple. We don’t get the luxury of making adjustments along the way.”

Thompson’s appearance here at a gathering of Midwestern Republicans highlighted a curious tension at the center of Thompson’s bid -- cheers and frenzy on one hand, uncertainty and stumbling on the other -- that makes it hard to tell how serious the endeavor really is.

A liberal activist today lodged a complaint (LINK HERE) with the Federal Election Commission against former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., contending that Thompson's "testing the waters" committee has long since surpassed that designation and that he, for all intents and purposes, is a candidate for president.

The rule is pretty simple. If you spend more than $5,000 on campaign activities, you're a candidate, whether or not you've officially declared. The question is what constitutes "testing the waters" activity, and what constitutes "candidate" activity.

In 2004 the conservative National and Legal Policy Center filed a complaint with the FEC (LINK HERE) alleging Sharpton was using the "testing the waters" committee to run an "off-the-books campaign," not declaring his candidacy officially while clearly a candidate, thus avoiding disclosure rules. The FEC investigated the matter, and arrived at a settlement with Sharpton.

The FEC ruled that Robertson had violated the "testing the waters" rules in 1988, fining him $25,000.

The campaigns of some of Thompson's potential GOP rivals have groused -- off the record -- that Thompson is similarly skirting the law.

Thompson was in Iowa over the weekend. Check him out HERE.

Thompson himself has been clear in interviews to NOT declare himself a candidate, telling CNN on August 17, "We are going to be getting in if we get in, and of course, we are in the testing the waters phase."

But how much is this once-staunch advocate of campaign finance reform truly "testing the waters"? In June Thompson signed a long-term lease on a Nashville location for his national campaign headquarters. He's been to Iowa and New Hampshire, and headlined GOP dinners.

Moreover, when Thompson filed his disclosure form with the IRS, he revealed that $72,000 of the $3.4 million raised is to be used for the general election. Former FEC General Counsel, Larry Noble told the Washington Post "I think it's problematic. Clearly it's a red flag." (LINK HERE)

The real issue here, for campaign finance reformer types?

Disclosure.

If Thompson waits until September 6 to formally declare his candidacy, he wouldn't have to disclose any of the cash given to his campaign until January 31 -- after many major contests are over, including the Iowa and Nevada Caucuses, and the New Hampshire, South Carolina, Michigan and Florida primaries.

Thompson's campaign says that he's complying with all rules and regulations, and Thompson has cast all questions about this in terms of him not doing things the way Washington, DC, insiders want them to be done.

There is plenty of time for Thompson to get in the race, but I can't imagine what he's going to run on? Like all the senators from both political parties running for President, Thompson has never managed anything in the private sector, say as a CEO of a company or been the leader of any organization; he, along with the other senators, has never been a "leader" in the public sector, say as a county manager, a mayor of a city, as a governor of a state, and none of them has ever "lead' 'managed' or been responsible for the results of a single public policy, so I ask the same of Thompson as I do of the other senators in the race: What exactly have you done in your life that would qualify you to be the nations chief executive and Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces? Can you share ONE executive leadership position you've held in either the public or private sector? Can you share ONE DECISION in which you were responsible for the results? There have been only two sitting senators elected to the presidency, so history shows when it comes down to it Americans elect Governors - those with chief executive experience - to the presidency.

The funny thing is, all these stories are designed to simply get Fred to announce his candidacy. once he does, the money and support will come rolling in more than most think. Most Fredheads are awaiting the announcement with great enthusiasm. I see his poll numbers surging right after the announcement and the money will roll with it. All the doubters will be VERY surprised...and scared. Fred is the kind of person that will rally the base and in the case of facing Billary, that base will be more motivated than it has been for a very long time.

I say this as a Romney supporter and someone who will vote for whoever wins the Republican nomination - I think Fred Thompson will peak the day he announces his candidacy - and go downhill from there, mainly due to his inability to raise funds. Just my 2 cents.

Fred lacks not only drive but also charisma. When I hear him speak he sounds old and tired. I think one of the reasons he is waiting so long to get into the race is because he trying to learn everything he is supposed to already know about the issues. He hadn't planned on running and so he is vastly unprepared in many ways.

I write to file a complaint against the Fred Thompson for President Exploratory Committee for violation of Federal Election Law under the Commission's jurisdiction. It is clear that he has violated 11 CFR 100.72, the "testing the waters" provision of FEC law. Accordingly, his failure to file disclosure reports violates the law, and the Commission should demand full disclosure of Mr. Thompson's campaign fund raising and expenditures, as well as penalize Mr. Thompson for his willful violation of the law.

As I understand the law, a "testing the waters" fund is only legitimate for the purpose of helping an individual decide whether he should become a candidate. Once someone has decided to become a candidate, the exemption no longer applies, and 11 CFR 100.72 lists five factors to determine when that has taken place. On three of these factors, the examples are numerous that indicate that Mr. Thompson has gone far beyond the activities and speech allowable under the law. These examples do not come from personal knowledge, but rather from numerous accounts in the press, some being direct quotations from Mr. Thompson or his staff. Other facts reported are from public documents available on the internet.

A. 11 CFR 100.72(B)(2) -- "The individual raises funds in excess of what could reasonably be expected to be used for exploratory activities or undertakes activities designed to amass campaign funds that would be spent after he or she becomes a candidate."

I know you meant it in a demeaning way but, Hey - that is funny! I needed the humor today. lol.

Actually, I meant that with all honesty. I was a Democratic voter in the '04 election, so I know something about what a bad candidate field looks like. However, I'm always happy to provide a laugh to my friends on the other side of the aisle.

What managerial experience does this guy have that qualifies him to be President? Um, none. What accomplishments in any sort of field does he have that qualifies him to be President? The answer is, again, nothing. It should take more than being an (allegedly) charismatic pro-life Southerner to be elected President of the U.S. during a time of war and economic problems. Let Thompson go show he can be governor of Tennesse or even mayor of Nashville before he runs for President. And for those who want to compare him to Reagan, let's remember that Reagan showed he could successfully govern a state before he became President.

Let's just simplify this now. A Liberal blogger filed a complaint. So what? How is this discredible? A biased blogger doesn't like Fred, who is breaking no rules. You are trying to Gonzalex Fred, now? LOL Good luck. Fred is too smart for that. Fred helped oust Nixon, spare Casey, and spare Clinton. The Dems fear him because he is fair and honest.

From the New York Times: www.nytimes.com/2007/08/27/us/politics/27thompson.html

In the end, Mr. Thompson earned respect from some unlikely corners.

“Initially, he was viewed as a hatchet man, but he ended up bending over in a way that refreshed me to try to be fair,” said Lanny Davis, the former White House special counsel. “He convinced those of us in the Clinton White House that it’s possible to be partisan and intellectually honest at the same time.”

What managerial experience does this guy have that qualifies him to be President? Um, none. What accomplishments in any sort of field does he have that qualifies him to be President? The answer is, again, nothing. It should take more than being an (allegedly) charismatic pro-life Southerner to be elected President of the U.S. during a time of war and economic problems. Let Thompson go show he can be governor of Tennesse or even mayor of Nashville before he runs for President. And for those who want to compare him to Reagan, let's remember that Reagan showed he could successfully govern a state before he became President.

Umm..he was a Senator. What has Hillary governed? Nothing. In fact name any major accomplishments she has had. You can't cause she hasn't done anything except jump on bandwagons and follow Bill's curtails around.

You're right, she's not qualified either. A man who turned a city of 8 million people from a crime-ridden mess ito a shining success story while managing a huge workforce and budget is very qualified to be President though.

Anybody that would get excited by Thompson running would get excited watching a hub cap rust.He would be the ultimate propped up president while the country club republicans ran the country from behind the scenes.Yeah it's fine to tell people like it is,but have a plan,unlike the Dems who only know how to complain but can't offer solutions besides government takeovers and higher taxes.

A Liberal blogger filed a complaint. So what? How is this discredible?

the same Liberal Blogger who posted the emails from Mark Foley to a sixteen year old House Page. That began the saga that has become famously known as Foley-gate.

the fact is the Law is the Law Fred and other neo cons may think the Law do not apply to them and that he is above the Law but us liberals believe in the rule of Law

The Law says

A. 11 CFR 100.72(B)(2) -- "The individual raises funds in excess of what could reasonably be expected to be used for exploratory activities or undertakes activities designed to amass campaign funds that would be spent after he or she becomes a candidate."

On July 31, 2007, Matt Mosk of the Washington Post reported on their blog that Mr. Thompson had filed paperwork with the Internal Revenue Service indicating that he had raised a sum of $3,400,000 for his campaign committee. (http://blog.washingtonpost.co... /> The Washington Post further reports that this same filing with the IRS indicated that $72,000 of this total was marked for use in the General Election. This is an egregious violation of the "testing the waters" clause, as it clearly indicates an intention for protracted campaign activity. In the same report, former FEC General Counsel, Larry Noble is quoted as saying "I think it's problematic. Clearly it's a red flag."

The report filed with the IRS shows the exact amount raised to be $3,463,355. It further shows expenditures in the amount of $625,743. Among the expenditures are further items worth the Commission's consideration. There were six expenditures totally $168,940 on internet services. This could fall under the advertising clause of the "testing the waters" exemption. Further, there is an expenditure in the amount of $21,142 for Media and $133 spent to Google AdWords, which is an internet advertising service. These all violate the paid advertising clause.

In addition, it is also worth noting that Mr. Thompson's campaign has disclosed that it has paid $88,789 in rent. That is a substantial sum and is another clear indicator that he is operating as a candidate. One further example is an expenditure of $25,322 on legal services. If Mr. Thompson were truly "testing the waters" then the legal needs of a true exploratory campaign would be minimal.

The fact he plans to announce sep 3 would mean he does not need to disclose his financial backers until mid January when the Nomination could be mostly decided. What is he hiding why is he is breaking the Law